Islam: The Religion of Peace...

[The Remnant]

... and a big stack of dead bodies. Last week a Muslim couple living in Canada killed their three daughters and another man who was married to one of the daughters. Evidently, the daughters had dishonored the family. Sounds reasonable.

[JohnnyMack]

Religion: A Bunch of Crap...

...www.americanhumanist.org

[The Remnant]

Unfortunately secularism is losing the battle in Europe.

[My Opinion Matters]

Well these are certainly well-reasoned and open-minded statements.

[The Remnant]

Thank you.

[GrapevineSooner]

Last week, some Muslims cooked us a very nice dinner at their Italian restaurant.

[Sooner04]

Wasn't Hitler a Christian?

[stoops the eternal pimp]

I'm sill trying to figure out what NP should do about the farting in the cubicle

[King Crimson]

every time someone is murdered in the US, a Christian nation we are told, do we chalk that up to religion?

we chalk up to idiots and bad people.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

... and a big stack of dead bodies. Last week a Muslim couple living in Canada killed their three daughters and another man who was married to one of the daughters. Evidently, the daughters had dishonored the family. Sounds reasonable.A wreath of garlic doesn't always look like a wreath...or garlic.

[olevetonahill]

Theres wackos in all religions even the atheist :rolleyes:

[The Remnant]

Monthly Jihad Report
June 2009 Jihad Attacks: 215

Countries: 21

Religions: 5

Dead Bodies: 925

Critically Injured: 1877

[olevetonahill]

Monthly Jihad Report
June 2009 Jihad Attacks: 215

Countries: 21

Religions: 5

Dead Bodies: 925

Critically Injured: 1877

So ya saying they got Mo than they Fair share ?:P

[King Crimson]

Monthly Jihad Report
June 2009 Jihad Attacks: 215

Countries: 21

Religions: 5

Dead Bodies: 925

Critically Injured: 1877

source? link?

[The Remnant]

Latest Offerings from the Religion of Peace
"He who fights that Islam should be superior fights in Allah's cause"
Muhammad, prophet of Islam

2009.07.27 (Bauchi, Nigeria) - At least five policemen are killed during a series of attacksy by Boko Haram Islamists.
2009.07.27 (Mogadishu, Somalia) - Six civilians are killed as a result of an attack on government troops by al-Shabaab militants at a market.
2009.07.26 (Ninewa, Iraq) - A Christian worker is murdered at a Pepsi plant by Islamic gunmen.
2009.07.26 (North Waziristan, Pakistan) - Three civilians are kidnapped and beheaded by religious extremists.
2009.07.26 (Khaldiyah, Iraq) - A suicide bomber kills five people trying to stop him from entering a funeral.
2009.07.26 (Baghdad, Iraq) - Four people are gunned down at a checkpoint by Jihadis.
taken from thereligionofpeace.com

[StoopTroup]

Theres wackos in all religions even the atheist :rolleyes:

Are you referring to post #2....lol

[olevetonahill]

Are you referring to poster #2....lol

Fixed
cause Im sure thats what ya wanted to say ;)

[King Crimson]

Latest Offerings from the Religion of Peace
"He who fights that Islam should be superior fights in Allah's cause"
Muhammad, prophet of Islam

2009.07.27 (Bauchi, Nigeria) - At least five policemen are killed during a series of attacksy by Boko Haram Islamists.
2009.07.27 (Mogadishu, Somalia) - Six civilians are killed as a result of an attack on government troops by al-Shabaab militants at a market.
2009.07.26 (Ninewa, Iraq) - A Christian worker is murdered at a Pepsi plant by Islamic gunmen.
2009.07.26 (North Waziristan, Pakistan) - Three civilians are kidnapped and beheaded by religious extremists.
2009.07.26 (Khaldiyah, Iraq) - A suicide bomber kills five people trying to stop him from entering a funeral.
2009.07.26 (Baghdad, Iraq) - Four people are gunned down at a checkpoint by Jihadis.
taken from thereligionofpeace.com

you got a source for this that isn't a slander job in it's url?

for instance, can i go see these numbers somewhere else. confirmed by another less politically motivated source?

[olevetonahill]

you got a source for this that isn't a slander job in it's url?

for instance, can i go see these numbers somewhere else. confirmed by another less politically motivated source?

Pickey bastard aint ya :cool:

[King Crimson]

Pickey bastard aint ya :cool:

not really, i just we ought to be able to support our claims with sources that aren't biased upfront in the url.

[KC//CRIMSON]

not really, i just we ought to be able to support our claims with sources that aren't biased upfront in the url.

It's hard to find a credible source when you're trying to stereotype an entire religion.

[Harry Beanbag]

you got a source for this that isn't a slander job in it's url?

for instance, can i go see these numbers somewhere else. confirmed by another less politically motivated source?

I'm trying not to get involved in this thread, but do you really believe those things didn't happen? They've been commiting acts like that for quite awhile now.

A five second Google search revealed the Pepsi incident...

http://en.aswataliraq.info/?p=116668

[stoopified]

not really, i just we ought to be able to support our claims with sources that aren't biased upfront in the url.When it comes to religion(or aetheism for that matter)there is NO SUCH THING AS UNBIASED.

[The Remnant]

I didn't know I was back in college writing a term paper.

[OklahomaTuba]

I didn't know I was back in college writing a term paper.Just depends on who the basher is.

If you're a left-wing/humanist anti-semite bigot, then its ok to sterotype Christians and Jews

If you're not a left-wing anti-semite bigot, then you are required to provide secondary and tertiary sourcing.

[JohnnyMack]

Just depends on who the basher is.

If you're a left-wing/humanist anti-semite bigot, then its ok to sterotype Christians and Jews

If you're not a left-wing anti-semite bigot, then you are required to provide secondary and tertiary sourcing.

Tuba,

You define the very concept of a bigot.

Does your hypocrisy know any limit?

The only reason for your "support" of Jews is that the particular mythology you subscribe to needs someone over in your "holy land" to protect it from being overrun by the dirty brown man.

[OklahomaTuba]

Tuba,

You define the very concept of a bigot.

Does your hypocrisy know any limit?

That funny, given your repeated barrage of bigoted and hate filled comments towards anything and anyone Christian and Jewish, on an nearly daily basis.

But I'm sure its ok in your mind, since hate and bigotry towards certain groups of people is acceptable to the non-religious.

And we wonder how the mass-genocides of the last 100 years happen in places like Germany, Russia, China, etc....

[JohnnyMack]

That funny, given your repeated barrage of bigoted and hate filled comments towards anything and anyone Christian and Jewish, on an nearly daily basis.

I like your omission of the Muslim, Hindu or Buddhist mythologies. Make it about me being hateful or bigoted towards your particular beliefs. Makes you more of a martyr that way, gives it more punch.

But I don't hate people who follow myths. I just encourage free thought and reason. The same kind of free thought and reason that led us to accept such concepts as the earth not being flat or our planet being the center of the universe.


But I'm sure its ok in your mind, since hate and bigotry towards certain groups of people is acceptable to the non-religious.

So, "hate and bigotry towards certain groups of people" is not acceptable to religious people? Hmm. I'd like to have witnessed the series of synapses that fired off in your coconut that led to that conclusion. I'd be curious just how accepting the ol' First Baptist Church of Owasso would be towards a Wiccan or a Muslim or a Buddhist that walked through its doors.


And we wonder how the mass-genocides of the last 100 years happen in places like Germany, Russia, China, etc....

Your repeated weak effort at linking the actions of a belief set as opposed to political groups towards mass murders and attempted genocide still doesn't jive. Unless of course you're willing to admit that the Christians started the Civil War and that the Baptists bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

[Mixer!]

.

[The Remnant]

The Third World colonisation of Britain proceeds apace with the news that the official police uniform has now been adapted to allow for the wearing of the Muslim hijab.

The police hijab is plain black and apparently made of a flame-retardant material. Officers will be able to wear a standard police hat on top of it if they wish.

Police sniffer dogs will have to wear bootees when searching the homes of Muslims so as not to cause offence.

Guidelines being drawn up by the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) urge awareness of religious sensitivities when using dogs to search for drugs and explosives. The guidelines, to be published this year, were designed to cover mosques but have been extended to include other buildings.
Got to love those Brits for their tolerance.

[My Opinion Matters]

It's just a real pain in the *** that world is full of people that are not exactly like you, isn't it Remnant?

[The Remnant]

British citizens get charged with the crime of hate speech for speaking out against radical Islam. One man who referred to Muslim drug dealers as “savages” was arrested for a hate crime. He calls Muslims the “protected species” and had to flee Britain because of threats on his life from Muslim gangs.
I guess I should be more tolerant.

[KC//CRIMSON]

I guess I should be more tolerant.

Or less bigoted, whatever works.....

[The Remnant]

Coming from you I will wear that label like a badge of honor, proudly. Just call me Mister Bigot.

[NormanPride]

I wonder if there are active Islamic groups trying to spread a good image about themselves. I know that if a denomination of Christianity went off the deep end that the other denominations would try to improve the image of the religion in general...

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Tuba,

You define the very concept of a bigot.

Does your hypocrisy know any limit?

The only reason for your "support" of Jews is that the particular mythology you subscribe to needs someone over in your "holy land" to protect it from being overrun by the dirty brown man.Isn't this post "actionable"?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I wonder if there are active Islamic groups trying to spread a good image about themselves. I know that if a denomination of Christianity went off the deep end that the other denominations would try to improve the image of the religion in general...FEAR, baby...

[C&CDean]

I wonder if there are active Islamic groups trying to spread a good image about themselves. I know that if a denomination of Christianity went off the deep end that the other denominations would try to improve the image of the religion in general...

We have one that did/does. Good ol' Phelps outta good ol' Kansas. Of course they're as looney as they come, but even with their uber-offensive stupidity, I don't see them blowing people up, cutting off their heads, and slaughtering their family members who bring their family shame by not covering their ugly mug, or getting raped.

Religion is not a bad thing in general. However, the very organized, opinionated, secular, "we're the only game that's the real game", TV god religions scare the hell outta me. Of course as bad as they are, they still aren't murdering people for ****s and grins like the muslims do.

So, in general terms, I don't trust me a muslim as far as I can throw his swarthy ***. In general terms...

[NormanPride]

Yeah, all that stuff is in the past. ;)

[beer4me]

I'm trying not to get involved in this thread, but do you really believe those things didn't happen? They've been commiting acts like that for quite awhile now.

A five second Google search revealed the Pepsi incident...

http://en.aswataliraq.info/?p=116668

Geeze HB have you not read any of kc posts;)

[JLEW1818]

last president who was not a Christian .. ready set go

[JohnnyMack]

Barack Obama.

[JLEW1818]

negative!

[JohnnyMack]

Although he professes to be a Christian, I'm not so sure.

He is a politician after all. A pretty smart one too.

[JLEW1818]

I'd say he is a Christian... he's a good guy too.

I'll give him that!

[JohnnyMack]

I'm voting Atheist. His background screams atheist, not Muslim or Christian. Again though, he's a pretty savvy politician.

[JLEW1818]

could be.. i guess we could always ask the kids!!

[Frozen Sooner]

There's a fairly good argument to be made that Thomas Jefferson wouldn't be considered a Christian by many Christians based only on his personal writings.

[MR2-Sooner86]

Just ask him who'd he'd root for in a fight, Muhammad or Jesus, or for the flying spaghetti monster to eat them both. You'll have your answer on what he really is then.

[JLEW1818]

ahh... so it's been a long time since we have not had a so called "Christian" president

[Frozen Sooner]

ahh... so it's been a long time since we have not had a so called "Christian" president

Well, I didn't say that he WASN'T a Christian, simply that many Christians might not agree that he was one. For example, he didn't believe that the Bible was the literal word of God.

I know there's people on here who think that Catholics aren't Christians either, so that brings us up to JFK. Of course people who think that are idiots, so there you go. ;)

So far as I know, we've never had a non-Christian as President. At least not one who self-proclaimed himself to not be one.

[JLEW1818]

true dat

[Frozen Sooner]

Then again, we've never had a self-proclaimed homosexual as President, but there's some evidence we've had a homosexual president before.

[JLEW1818]

:hot: :hot: :hot: :hot: :eek:

[Frozen Sooner]

Maybe even two!

[Curly Bill]

One of em has to be Carter. :D

[Frozen Sooner]

Carter has walking proof that he's not.

Then again, he was a submarine guy. *jabs Harry with a stick*

[Curly Bill]

Carter has walking proof that he's not.

Then again, he was a submarine guy. *jabs Harry with a stick*

Carter has walking proof that he had sex with a female -- that doesn't rule out the other. ;) ;)

[KC//CRIMSON]

Maybe even two!

http://www.explosm.net/db/files/Comics/Rob/carnival.png

[Harry Beanbag]

Carter has walking proof that he's not.

Then again, he was a submarine guy. *jabs Harry with a stick*

Considering the topic, what do you mean by "stick"?

[JohnnyMack]

Room.

[Frozen Sooner]

Considering the topic, what do you mean by "stick"?

Well hell-O sailor!

[C&CDean]

You guys can even fag up a muslim thread.

[Harry Beanbag]

You guys can even fag up a muslim thread.

Speaking of that, the men in that region of the world have a saying: women are for babies, boys are for fun. It's a really odd and creepy feeling to have a middle aged Saudi buying you and your group of sailor buddies a round of drinks. :eek:

[tbl]

I just encourage free thought and reason.

Right... Because Christianity isn't rational or reasonable. :rolleyes:

Have you ever read anything by WL Craig? Lee Strobel? JP Moreland? There is a strong movement in Christendom which discusses the philosophical and scientific rationale behind belief in God, in particular the God of the Bible. If you were to be truly open minded and rational in your study of the issue, you may find that Christianity is very rationale and reasonable.

It's interesting that closed agnostics/atheists are possibly the most closed minded groups of people out there, yet claim to be completely open to anything (so long as God is not in the equation). There is no difference between an extreme fundamentalist "King James only" Christian and an avowed atheist that absolutely "knows" God doesn't exist...

[JohnnyMack]

Right... Because Christianity isn't rational or reasonable. :rolleyes:

Have you ever read anything by WL Craig? Lee Strobel? JP Moreland? There is a strong movement in Christendom which discusses the philosophical and scientific rationale behind belief in God, in particular the God of the Bible. If you were to be truly open minded and rational in your study of the issue, you may find that Christianity is very rationale and reasonable.

It's interesting that closed agnostics/atheists are possibly the most closed minded groups of people out there, yet claim to be completely open to anything (so long as God is not in the equation). There is no difference between an extreme fundamentalist "King James only" Christian and an avowed atheist that absolutely "knows" God doesn't exist...

Do you want to have a long or a short discussion about the Abrahamic religions having being formed out of that region's previous set of beliefs that being Zoroastrianism?

Should we discuss how Constantine chose Christianity as the religion not for purposes of faith but rather in an effort to gain power and defeat his chief rival so he could become emperor of the Roman empire? And then we could discuss how that decision led to the Roman empire invading western Europe and working towards destroying all the "pagan" religions of the area and replacing it with their ideology. I mean we've seen that effort continue for centuries, just ask the Native Americans how their set of beliefs were accepted as manifest destiny tore across the fruited plain.

Overall the arrogance of ANY person to say that their mythology is right and true and that someone else's is not is quite simply appalling. Can you prove, I mean prove to me that the mythology of ancient Greece isn't correct? Or that Odin isn't REALLY pissed off at you for the way you're acting? To me mythology is closely to tied to culture. Don't confuse the cultural relevance of a particular set of beliefs with truth.

Try reading Joseph Campbell's The Power of Myth.

[My Opinion Matters]

I'm the furthest thing you'll ever find from a bible-thumper. I haven't been to a church service in...years. With that said, I truly pity atheists.

[The Remnant]

Unfortunately in today's Europe, cultural relativism is no match for Islam. I wish it wasn't so.

[soonerscuba]

Unfortunately in today's Europe, cultural relativism is no match for Islam. I wish it wasn't so.Which really explains the Paris riots.

[adoniijahsooner]

If you want to go by the numbers; well, no religion has murdered, tortured, or persecuted like christianity. It has no equal when it comes to violence and bloodlust. There was a time when you saw soldiers on horseback with a crucifix adorned across their breast and galloping wildly into your village, you would literally **** your pants; and yet all christians were not of the same spirit. I would not fear a muslim anymore than I fear Joel Osteen.

[The Remnant]

Dhimmitude isn't so bad. Heck, I've even heard that freedom is overrated.

[KC//CRIMSON]

Unfortunately in today's Europe, cultural relativism is no match for Islam. I wish it wasn't so.

Whew! Good thing you don't, you know, live in Europe.

[The Remnant]

From Thursday, July 30, 2009.
ISLAMIC law has been ushered into Britain by the back door.

Ministers have quietly given Sharia courts power to rule on Muslim civil cases.

Powers of Sharia judges have been sanctioned at five courts in London, Birmingham, Bradford, Manchester and Nuneaton, Warwicks.

Two more are planned for Glasgow and Edinburgh. If both parties in a dispute agree to abide by their rulings, they are enforceable with the full power of the judicial system.

[soonerscuba]

From Thursday, July 30, 2009.
ISLAMIC law has been ushered into Britain by the back door.

Ministers have quietly given Sharia courts power to rule on Muslim civil cases.

Powers of Sharia judges have been sanctioned at five courts in London, Birmingham, Bradford, Manchester and Nuneaton, Warwicks.

Two more are planned for Glasgow and Edinburgh. If both parties in a dispute agree to abide by their rulings, they are enforceable with the full power of the judicial system.You mean that two indenpendent parties that both choose to be privvy to a certain set of rules under arbitration is enforceable by a court system? The horror.

[tbl]

Do you want to have a long or a short discussion about the Abrahamic religions having being formed out of that region's previous set of beliefs that being Zoroastrianism?

Should we discuss how Constantine chose Christianity as the religion not for purposes of faith but rather in an effort to gain power and defeat his chief rival so he could become emperor of the Roman empire? And then we could discuss how that decision led to the Roman empire invading western Europe and working towards destroying all the "pagan" religions of the area and replacing it with their ideology. I mean we've seen that effort continue for centuries, just ask the Native Americans how their set of beliefs were accepted as manifest destiny tore across the fruited plain.

Overall the arrogance of ANY person to say that their mythology is right and true and that someone else's is not is quite simply appalling. Can you prove, I mean prove to me that the mythology of ancient Greece isn't correct? Or that Odin isn't REALLY pissed off at you for the way you're acting? To me mythology is closely to tied to culture. Don't confuse the cultural relevance of a particular set of beliefs with truth.

Try reading Joseph Campbell's The Power of Myth.

I'm not going to get into a lengthy discussion on this because it always proves fruitless. I HAVE researched into the information you have discussed and every time I do I come away strengthened in my faith. Ultimately to compare Greek mythology to Christianity proves how uninformed you are. I'm not trying to be condescending with that statement, but there's really no other way to put it. You've obviously done research to support your belief system, but have done little research into Biblical truth claims.

I have put "The Power of Myth" on hold at my local library and I'll check it out. I'll let you know my review once I've dug into it. I'm not afraid to put the claims of Christianity up against anything. If I were to duck my head in the sand and say "well the Bible says so, so it's true", that wouldn't help much in my evangelism or my walk, and sadly many Christians do this exact thing. They are uninformed and feel they can't engage in the hefty issues with other belief systems (atheists included). I'm not scared at all to delve into the difficult questions and speculations. I have done research on both sides of the aisle and Christianity always comes out unscathed. How can I fulfill the greatest commandment if I don't use my mind? (Matthew 22:36-38)

As opposed to engaging in a discussion that could never work since there have been volumes of books written on the subjects, I'll ask you to be "open minded" as well and check out some works by some of the authors I suggested. I guarantee you some of these will be in your local library system, so no need to pay any money.

WL Craig - Reasonable Faith
Lee Strobel - "The Case for" books (Faith, Christ, a Creator, the Real Jesus)
Norman Geisler - I don't have enough faith to be an atheist
Ravi Zacharias - Jesus among other Gods

This is just a snippet of some of the information available. I think to get a general feel you could go with any of the "Case for" books. All of them are good books that get into bullet points on the issues but don't bog down into the depths like some of the authors/professors he interviews. All the other books are good as well.

Happy reading!

[tbl]

If you want to go by the numbers; well, no religion has murdered, tortured, or persecuted like christianity. It has no equal when it comes to violence and bloodlust. There was a time when you saw soldiers on horseback with a crucifix adorned across their breast and galloping wildly into your village, you would literally **** your pants; and yet all christians were not of the same spirit. I would not fear a muslim anymore than I fear Joel Osteen.

This argument is so easy to shoot down it's almost not worth doing...

You will not find a single commandment in the New Testament that condones violence. Jesus Himself was the antithesis of violence aside from his expulsion of the traders from the temple. All the writings of the NT command followers of Christ to be humble, at peace with all men (as much as is in our power to do so), submit to the governing authorities, etc. What supposed followers have done in the name of Christ has absolutely nothing to do with Christianity itself, since the violent acts are completely contrary to the teaching of Christ.

Compare the two men that founded the religions however, and that's where the true comparison lies. Muslims that commit violence follow in the steps of Muhammad himself, his actions and his commandments. "Christians" that commit violence do the exact opposite of what Christ did and also commanded His disciples to do.

There is no comparison. Weak sauce, dude... Try again...

[adoniijahsooner]

This argument is so easy to shoot down it's almost not worth doing...

You will not find a single commandment in the New Testament that condones violence. Jesus Himself was the antithesis of violence aside from his expulsion of the traders from the temple. All the writings of the NT command followers of Christ to be humble, at peace with all men (as much as is in our power to do so), submit to the governing authorities, etc. What supposed followers have done in the name of Christ has absolutely nothing to do with Christianity itself, since the violent acts are completely contrary to the teaching of Christ.

Compare the two men that founded the religions however, and that's where the true comparison lies. Muslims that commit violence follow in the steps of Muhammad himself, his actions and his commandments. "Christians" that commit violence do the exact opposite of what Christ did and also commanded His disciples to do.

There is no comparison. Weak sauce, dude... Try again...

We are not talking about the bible, we are talking about the people who represent the religion, which in real life has more impact than the words in the book. When Jesus said, "By this shall all man know you are my disciples, if you have love one for another", he was basically saying people learn christianity by what they see from it's followers. So if you believe that torturing people is a good way to spread his message then you are way off nephew. Christ was the Word of God, the way he lived and loved spoke who God was, where as the 10 commandments only placed fear in the hearts of the jews. The iniquisition wasnt bible based, but the people who performed it, say they were of Christ. All muslims are not the same either, whether you believe it or not. True spirituality isnt a thing to be debated or played. No one wins when people are filled with self righteousness and bigotry.

[JohnnyMack]

I'm not going to get into a lengthy discussion on this because it always proves fruitless. I HAVE researched into the information you have discussed and every time I do I come away strengthened in my faith. Ultimately to compare Greek mythology to Christianity proves how uninformed you are. I'm not trying to be condescending with that statement, but there's really no other way to put it. You've obviously done research to support your belief system, but have done little research into Biblical truth claims.

I have put "The Power of Myth" on hold at my local library and I'll check it out. I'll let you know my review once I've dug into it. I'm not afraid to put the claims of Christianity up against anything. If I were to duck my head in the sand and say "well the Bible says so, so it's true", that wouldn't help much in my evangelism or my walk, and sadly many Christians do this exact thing. They are uninformed and feel they can't engage in the hefty issues with other belief systems (atheists included). I'm not scared at all to delve into the difficult questions and speculations. I have done research on both sides of the aisle and Christianity always comes out unscathed. How can I fulfill the greatest commandment if I don't use my mind? (Matthew 22:36-38)

As opposed to engaging in a discussion that could never work since there have been volumes of books written on the subjects, I'll ask you to be "open minded" as well and check out some works by some of the authors I suggested. I guarantee you some of these will be in your local library system, so no need to pay any money.

WL Craig - Reasonable Faith
Lee Strobel - "The Case for" books (Faith, Christ, a Creator, the Real Jesus)
Norman Geisler - I don't have enough faith to be an atheist
Ravi Zacharias - Jesus among other Gods

This is just a snippet of some of the information available. I think to get a general feel you could go with any of the "Case for" books. All of them are good books that get into bullet points on the issues but don't bog down into the depths like some of the authors/professors he interviews. All the other books are good as well.

Happy reading!

While I was mostly talking about Christianity in my previous post I think it's important to state that I'm not hating on Christianity. I actually think some of its writings contain valuable insight (in a metaphorical presentation) of how one can improve his or her life.

What I do think is that the dogmatic underpinnings of Christianity, Islam, and every other mythology that has ever surfaced on the globe are bull****. I don't accept any teachings from as far back as ancient Sumeria to as recently as Scientology as having any legitimacy. Some may offer a road map for an individuals seeking to improve themselves morally and ethically, but I don't think any single religion offers more than that. I do not believe in the supernatural. Period.

[tbl]

We are not talking about the bible, we are talking about the people who represent the religion, which in real life has more impact than the words in the book. When Jesus said, "By this shall all man know you are my disciples, if you have love one for another", he was basically saying people learn christianity by what they see from it's followers. So if you believe that torturing people is a good way to spread his message then you are way off nephew. Christ was the Word of God, the way he lived and loved spoke who God was, where as the 10 commandments only placed fear in the hearts of the jews. The iniquisition wasnt bible based, but the people who performed it, say they were of Christ. All muslims are not the same either, whether you believe it or not. True spirituality isnt a thing to be debated or played. No one wins when people are filled with self righteousness and bigotry.

I know not all Muslims are violent. I never said they were. I said that when they do commit violence, they are not outside the boundaries of their religions founder or his teachings. When professing Christians commit violent acts, they are completely contrary to the commandments and living example of Jesus Christ.

Your original post was just a blanket statement about more evil has been done in the name of Christianity than any other religion. I didn't say that was a false statement. My point is look at the originators of the religion and determine if the followers of said religion are faithful to their teachings and examples.

If you're going to seemingly throw Christianity under the bus based on the actions of some of it's followers, you need to be prepared to have a defense for your rationale. If your intent was to try and even the cards a little to make Islam seem better, you failed there as well.

Muhammad = violent person that advocated violence in certain circumstances

Jesus = Turn the other cheek, do good to those that mistreat you, love your enemies, etc.

[tbl]

I do not believe in the supernatural. Period.

This is why it's easier to argue with a snake holding, kool aid drinking, Hale Bopp riding wacko than it is an atheist. To be so bold as to claim to KNOW there is no supernatural is truly unreasonable.

Since it's safe to assume you won't be willing to take the same step I am in regard to reading a book recommended from the other side, I'll link you to a couple of articles online. Maybe you'll at least take the time to click on those.

This one is pretty good, and not too long of a read.
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6645



Regardless of whether you read them or not, I'd like to have these resources posted for any other Christians, skeptics, etc.

Complete list of some more in depth articles
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/PageServer?pagename=scholarly_articles_main

More basic articles
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/PageServer?pagename=popular_articles_main

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

If you want to go by the numbers; well, no religion has murdered, tortured, or persecuted like christianity. It has no equal when it comes to violence and bloodlust. There was a time when you saw soldiers on horseback with a crucifix adorned across their breast and galloping wildly into your village, you would literally **** your pants; and yet all christians were not of the same spirit. I would not fear a muslim anymore than I fear Joel Osteen.Let's all take that time machine back to the 13th century, and we'll be on the same page as you, haha.

[adoniijahsooner]

Let's all take that time machine back to the 13th century, and we'll be on the same page as you, haha.

Or we could get a vid of the republican national convention, and we'll have enough evidence to last decades of what bigots and intolerant christians are capable of.

[WILBURJIM]

Wasn't Hitler a Christian?

Adolph was born and raised a Christian but his later life he pretty much rejected Christianity. A couple of choice quotes:

"I can imagine people being enthusiastic about the paradise of Mahomet, but as for the insipid paradise of the Christians! In your lifetime, you used to hear the music of Richard Wagner. After your death, it will be nothing but hallelujahs, the waving of palms, children of an age for the feeding-bottle, and hoary old men. The man of the isles pays homage to the forces of nature. But Christianity is an invention of sick brains: one could imagine nothing more senseless — A negro with his taboos is crushingly superior to the human being who seriously believes in transubstantiation."

"The peoples of Islam will always be closer to us than, for example, France."

[JohnnyMack]

This is why it's easier to argue with a snake holding, kool aid drinking, Hale Bopp riding wacko than it is an atheist. To be so bold as to claim to KNOW there is no supernatural is truly unreasonable.

Since it's safe to assume you won't be willing to take the same step I am in regard to reading a book recommended from the other side, I'll link you to a couple of articles online. Maybe you'll at least take the time to click on those.

This one is pretty good, and not too long of a read.
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6645



Regardless of whether you read them or not, I'd like to have these resources posted for any other Christians, skeptics, etc.

Complete list of some more in depth articles
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/PageServer?pagename=scholarly_articles_main

More basic articles
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/PageServer?pagename=popular_articles_main

I didn't say I KNOW, I said I do not believe. I cannot look at all the science surrounding the sheer size of our universe and think that it is a product of a supernatural being. If it is, it's the most insanely inefficient deity ever concocted.

I think religions are tied to their cultures. Some stand the test of time, some don't. I think they serve to offer solace and hope to people who don't find it elsewhere. I think religion needs evolve into more of a personal journey, introspective type theology if it's going to survive. Buddhism is my favorite of the established religions as it focuses more on the individual and less on dogma.

[Harry Beanbag]

Or we could get a vid of the republican national convention, and we'll have enough evidence to last decades of what bigots and intolerant christians are capable of.

What did they do, promote the murder of babies or something?

[KC//CRIMSON]

What did they do, promote the murder of babies or something?

Funny, I'm almost positive we had a republican president in office when Roe vs Wade was ruled/passed by the Supreme Court.

[Harry Beanbag]

Funny, I'm almost positive we had a republican president in office when Roe vs Wade was ruled/passed by the Supreme Court.

So?

[KC//CRIMSON]

So?

So, is your joke implying that only dems (in your terms promote) abortion?

[Frozen Sooner]

He didn't say abortion. He said baby-murder.

And that's a Republican platform I could get behind.

[KC//CRIMSON]

He didn't say abortion. He said baby-murder.

And that's a Republican platform I could get behind.


Heh, I'll warn the state of Alabama.

[Harry Beanbag]

So, is your joke implying that only dems (in your terms promote) abortion?

Yes. Abortion for all is in the Democrat platform. And I'm still waiting on you to tell me how Roe v. Wade is connected to the Nixon administration, other than time wise.

The only joke is you.

[soonerscuba]

Nixon hated Jews, as well as the unborn.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Or we could get a vid of the republican national convention, and we'll have enough evidence to last decades of what bigots and intolerant christians are capable of.My, aren't you the happy fella?!(and so sadly misguided)

[JLEW1818]

kill innocent babies, yet keep murders alive, and people that rape 80 year old women.

[KC//CRIMSON]

Yes. Abortion for all is in the Democrat platform. And I'm still waiting on you to tell me how Roe v. Wade is connected to the Nixon administration, other than time wise.

The only joke is you.


Abortion for all, hilarious. Oh, and you mean Richard M. Nixon who never made one public comment about the decision? Not even one "I oppose!" It really doesn't surprise me since he was a stupid, bigoted, president.

[JLEW1818]

did you like Ronald Reagan?

[tbl]

I cannot look at all the science surrounding the sheer size of our universe and think that it is a product of a supernatural being. If it is, it's the most insanely inefficient deity ever concocted.


Are you kidding me???? Good grief, man... Do you have any idea as to the kind of fine tuning we have in our universe in order for life to be possible? What about the big bang theory? Are you aware of how much fine tuning had to take place for that to happen? Not only that, we also KNOW that space, time, and all everything in the universe had a beginning at a finite point in time. All the cosmological constants, the law of gravity, etc... all began to exist around 14 billion years ago. This is not a static universe as scientists once believed. It began to exist.

As is pointed out in the Kalam cosmological argument:
1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.

From the very nature of the case, this cause must be an uncaused, changeless, timeless, and immaterial being which created the universe. It must be uncaused because we've seen that there cannot be an infinite regress of causes. It must be timeless and therefore changeless—at least without the universe—because it created time. Because it also created space, it must transcend space as well and therefore be immaterial, not physical.



Seriously man... how one can look at the intricacies in our universe and call it inefficient or not see the obvious signs that something greater is at work beyond us baffles me.

[Harry Beanbag]

Abortion for all, hilarious.

Straight from the Democrat Party Platform:


The Democrat Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a women's right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.

http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/images/icons/kerry.gifAbortions for all!




Oh, and you mean Richard M. Nixon who never made one public comment about the decision? Not even one "I oppose!" It really doesn't surprise me since he was a stupid, bigoted, president.

You brought him up, still not sure what your point was. But it's really no surprise that you think he was stupid and bigoted. Most people are in your world.

[KC//CRIMSON]

Straight from the Democrat Party Platform: Abortion for all!

That's great Harry, now tell us something we don't already know. Cute slogan you came up with....



You brought him up, still not sure what your point was.

Does the name Harry Blackmun ring a bell? It should, not only did he author the courts opinion on Roe vs Wade as a Supreme Court Judge, he was the biggest advocate of Roe vs Wade and one of the biggest supporters of women and abortion rights.

Guess who he was hand selected by, Cletus?



But it's really no surprise that you think he was stupid and bigoted.

On Nixon Tapes, Ambivalence Over Abortion, Not Watergate: Nixon worried that greater access to abortions would foster “permissiveness,” and said that “it breaks the family.” But he also saw a need for abortion in some cases — like interracial pregnancies, he said.

“There are times when an abortion is necessary. I know that. When you have a black and a white,” he told an aide, before adding, “Or a rape.”



Most people are in your world.

You're a clown.

[JohnnyMack]

Are you kidding me???? Good grief, man... You either don't have a very good grasp of astrophysics or you're completely delusional. Do you have any idea as to the kind of fine tuning we have in our universe in order for life to be possible? What about the big bang theory? Are you aware of how much fine tuning had to take place for that to happen? Not only that, we also KNOW that space, time, and all everything in the universe had a beginning at a finite point in time. All the cosmological constants, the law of gravity, etc... all began to exist around 14 billion years ago. This is not a static universe as scientists once believed. It began to exist.

As is pointed out in the Kalam cosmological argument:
1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.

From the very nature of the case, this cause must be an uncaused, changeless, timeless, and immaterial being which created the universe. It must be uncaused because we've seen that there cannot be an infinite regress of causes. It must be timeless and therefore changeless—at least without the universe—because it created time. Because it also created space, it must transcend space as well and therefore be immaterial, not physical.



Seriously man... how one can look at the intricacies in our universe and call it inefficient or not see the obvious signs that something greater is at work beyond us baffles me.

So this deity of yours waited 14 billion years to drop us down on this rock?

[Frozen Sooner]

Odd that the Democratic Party Platform would include language referring the the Democrat Party, since that's a pejorative Republicans try to use as an insult.

Edit: however, with the substitution of "Democratic" for "Democrat" the posted quote is accurate.

[jkjsooner]

All the cosmological constants, the law of gravity, etc... all began to exist around 14 billion years ago.


You must be confused. 14,000,000,000 is quite a lot larger than 6000.

Just giving you a hard time. It's those people that actually believe the universe is 6000 years old who seriously drive me crazy. They are the ones who are doing more harm to Christianity than anyone...

[jkjsooner]

Let's all take that time machine back to the 13th century, and we'll be on the same page as you, haha.

The context of some of these arguments was around the condemnation of a religion based on the actions of its followers.

In that respect, the timing of the action is quite irrelevant. If I say, "Muslims actions clear prove that Islam is a false religion," then I would have to apply the same rationale to Christianity based events that occured in the 13th century.

The fact that I live in the 21st century is quite irrelevant when attempting to determine the truth of either religion.

Now, if one is arguing that we can't condemn today's Muslims because of our past then that would be illogical but I don't think that is where adoniijahsooner was going.

Anyway, some may argue that the Quran encourages/promotes violence and that Islam's spread has been based on little except violence and it has ALWAYS been very violent then that's a different argument as well...

[tbl]

So this deity of yours waited 14 billion years to drop us down on this rock?

Yes... So? The fine tuning of the universe and of our planet in particular has worked out so that intelligent life can flourish. Without earth being billions of years old before we were created, I couldn't be having this discussion with you via the webz. ;)

[tbl]

Anyway, some may argue that the Quran encourages/promotes violence and that Islam's spread has been based on little except violence and it has ALWAYS been very violent then that's a different argument as well...

That is THE argument, and it's completely accurate. Not just the Quran, but the Hadith as well (similar to the Catholics catechism). They don't necessarily need violence to spread the religion now. They are breeding like crazy and also still winning some converts through standard evangelism as well. That said, if a muslim IS violent, they have support from their holy books, their prophet, and their history.

On another note, if I were to be transported back to the 13th century, I would most assuredly be put to death by people claiming to be Christian. That however has zilch to do with the Bible and the teachings of Christ and the apostles.

[tbl]

You must be confused. 14,000,000,000 is quite a lot larger than 6000.

Just giving you a hard time. It's those people that actually believe the universe is 6000 years old who seriously drive me crazy. They are the ones who are doing more harm to Christianity than anyone...

I have many brothers and sisters in Christ who line up with the young universe theory. I try to discuss the Biblical support for an old universe and sometimes I can get through to them. The hangup is the account in Genesis and the English translation of the Hebrew word "yom", which is translated as "day" in Genesis 1. The thing they don't get is you have to look at the context, the Hebrew language, etc, and it's easy to see that "yom" is translated in many different ways and has many different meanings (age, long span of time, 24 hour day, etc).

While I do agree with them that God could have created the universe in 6 literal days, our roads split when I ask why He would do this and create the appearance of age. It makes no sense, and since there is strong Biblical support for an old universe, I do the best I can to explain why I believe what I do.

In an extremely tiny nutshell; what do geologists believe the primitive earth was covered with? Water. What does Genesis state the earth looked like on day one? It's covered with water. Land finally appears through tectonic plate activity. Plant life appears first, then sea animals, then the rest of the animals, all compatible with the established scientific record. Last of all creation is man, made in His own image and distinct from the rest of creation, then God enters the Sabbath rest from His creative works. How many new species have been introduced into the fossil record since man came on the scene? None.

and so on...

[Frozen Sooner]

This is why it's easier to argue with a snake holding, kool aid drinking, Hale Bopp riding wacko than it is an atheist. To be so bold as to claim to KNOW there is no supernatural is truly unreasonable.

Whereas to KNOW that there IS supernatural is perfectly reasonable. :rolleyes:

I don't claim to KNOW that there is no supernatural. I just don't think there's any particular reason TO believe that there is a supernatural. Simply stating that things aren't explainable without the supernatural isn't any kind of proof-people used to think lightning was supernatural in origin for the same reason.

You're welcome to your beliefs, and you're even welcome to politely discuss them with me. Please don't ascribe to me beliefs I have never espoused.

[Frozen Sooner]

Adolph was born and raised a Christian but his later life he pretty much rejected Christianity. A couple of choice quotes:

"I can imagine people being enthusiastic about the paradise of Mahomet, but as for the insipid paradise of the Christians! In your lifetime, you used to hear the music of Richard Wagner. After your death, it will be nothing but hallelujahs, the waving of palms, children of an age for the feeding-bottle, and hoary old men. The man of the isles pays homage to the forces of nature. But Christianity is an invention of sick brains: one could imagine nothing more senseless — A negro with his taboos is crushingly superior to the human being who seriously believes in transubstantiation."

"The peoples of Islam will always be closer to us than, for example, France."

He was above all an opportunist. He seized on any religion (or lack) that furthered his goals.

[adoniijahsooner]

The argument that Jesus taught peace and Mohammed taught violence can be open for serious debate. Jesus said...


"But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me." Luke 19.27

And you cannot discount the Old Testament stories where Saul and others were given ill orders from the Lord's prophets.


1 Samuel15:3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ***.

It is still written thousands of years later, and any unstable fool, could use those words and justify themselves in slaughtering "God's enemies". What would you tell them to convince them otherwise, seeing that they have it upon inspiration to satisfy their hatred and intolerance of others. Lastly, the whole doctrine of God's enemies burning for eternity in everlasting anguish and misery, seems to be pretty extreme for only a lifetime of sin.

[JLEW1818]

Christians go to heaven

[Frozen Sooner]

adonijah-

You might be interested to read a book titled The Evolution of God. I'm about halfway through, but so far it's a historical trace of how semitic culture grew from animism through pantheism, polytheism, and monolatry to the monotheistic Abrahamic religions.

[adoniijahsooner]

What did they do, promote the murder of babies or something?

They were constantly spouting off, "Barack is a muslim", and other like insinuations. Obviously saying that anyone who is not a christian, isnt good enough to lead our country.

[adoniijahsooner]

adonijah-

You might be interested to read a book titled The Evolution of God. I'm about halfway through, but so far it's a historical trace of how semitic culture grew from animism through pantheism, polytheism, and monolatry to the monotheistic Abrahamic religions.

I'll go pick it up tomorrow, where did you find it?

[Frozen Sooner]

Amazon. I hate paper books anymore. :D

The author's name is Robert Wright, hopefully that helps.

Right now I'm reading the parts about the Josaic reforms and the evidence that Josiah was possibly the most important figure in the development of monotheism.

[adoniijahsooner]

Amazon. I hate paper books anymore. :D

Thanks

[JohnnyMack]

Amazon. I hate paper books anymore. :D


Meh.

[Harry Beanbag]

They were constantly spouting off, "Barack is a muslim", and other like insinuations. Obviously saying that anyone who is not a christian, isnt good enough to lead our country.

I'll take your word for it, I didn't care enough to watch it.

[Harry Beanbag]

Odd that the Democratic Party Platform would include language referring the the Democrat Party, since that's a pejorative Republicans try to use as an insult.

Edit: however, with the substitution of "Democratic" for "Democrat" the posted quote is accurate.


Yeah, that was my typing mistake. I couldn't copy and paste it so I had to transcribe it here. Doing so with a 1 year old crawling all over you can be a bit distracting. Sorry. Unless you're just trying to be really petty, not sure what difference it makes.

[Harry Beanbag]

Does the name Harry Blackmun ring a bell? It should, not only did he author the courts opinion on Roe vs Wade as a Supreme Court Judge, he was the biggest advocate of Roe vs Wade and one of the biggest supporters of women and abortion rights.

Guess who he was hand selected by, Cletus?

I'm going to say So? again. This does nothing to prove whatever lame point you were trying to make that Presidential administrations have anything to do with Supreme Court decisions other than the crapshoot of appointing Justices.





On Nixon Tapes, Ambivalence Over Abortion, Not Watergate: Nixon worried that greater access to abortions would foster “permissiveness,” and said that “it breaks the family.” But he also saw a need for abortion in some cases — like interracial pregnancies, he said.

“There are times when an abortion is necessary. I know that. When you have a black and a white,” he told an aide, before adding, “Or a rape.”

Yeah, I've read that. He certainly wasn't promoting abortion for all was he?





You're a clown.

I thought you were the funny guy, with your "jokes' and all.

[soonerscuba]

For someone who hated Jews so much, he sure did let Kissinger act like an *******.

[WILBURJIM]

The argument that Jesus taught peace and Mohammed taught violence can be open for serious debate. Jesus said...

"But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me." Luke 19.27

Did Jesus command this? Or was he quoting another person in a story?

[tbl]

The argument that Jesus taught peace and Mohammed taught violence can be open for serious debate. Jesus said...


He's speaking in a parable, and the context is obviously referring to the judgment. That's not "serious debate".




And you cannot discount the Old Testament stories where Saul and others were given ill orders from the Lord's prophets.

The Old Testament was a theocracy with God as the ruler of Israel. If anybody were to take the OT and run with it to commit violence, it would have to be an orthodox Jew to make any sense.

I'm not saying one COULDN'T pull things out of context in the Bible and commit crimes to blame on God. That happens all the time... but we just have to look at the context of the Scripture itself.

[SoonerProphet]

the context.

That is the real kicker right there.

[jkjsooner]

He's speaking in a parable, and the context is obviously referring to the judgment. That's not "serious debate".




The Old Testament was a theocracy with God as the ruler of Israel. If anybody were to take the OT and run with it to commit violence, it would have to be an orthodox Jew to make any sense.

I'm not saying one COULDN'T pull things out of context in the Bible and commit crimes to blame on God. That happens all the time... but we just have to look at the context of the Scripture itself.

Too many Christians dismiss the Old Testament when it's convenient and use it when it suits their needs (Exodus 21:23-27 for example).

When questioned on it they seem to contort themselves with strange logic...

[Frozen Sooner]

Yeah, that was my typing mistake. I couldn't copy and paste it so I had to transcribe it here. Doing so with a 1 year old crawling all over you can be a bit distracting. Sorry. Unless you're just trying to be really petty, not sure what difference it makes.

I thought that it was odd that something that purported to be a quote from the Democratic Party platform would contain that particular wording-thinking that possibly you pulled the quote from something that wasn't the actual platform. Surely you can see that a quote containing a wording that is amazingly unlikely to have been used by the quoted speaker casts doubt on the provenance of the quote.

When I had a minute to pull the party platform, I acknowledged that the quote with that one exception was actually correct.

Short version: I doubted your quote's accuracy, as it contained language that would not appear in the Democratic Party platform. After I had time to check, I acknowledged that I was in the wrong. My apologies for originally casting aspersions on your quote and for seeming like I was nit-picking.

[adoniijahsooner]

He's speaking in a parable, and the context is obviously referring to the judgment. That's not "serious debate".




The Old Testament was a theocracy with God as the ruler of Israel. If anybody were to take the OT and run with it to commit violence, it would have to be an orthodox Jew to make any sense.

I'm not saying one COULDN'T pull things out of context in the Bible and commit crimes to blame on God. That happens all the time... but we just have to look at the context of the Scripture itself.

But there are other sayings as well, that are not parables...


Matthew 10:34 - "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword."


Matthew 11:12- "...the kingdom of Heaven suffereth violence and the violent take it by force."

You see, we can do this little song and dance forever. I would much rather focus on the sayings of Christ that promote forgiving those that wrong you and despitefully use you, or turning the other cheek, or the meek shall inherit the earth, and lastly, how often shall we forgive our brother, and Jesus said, If your brother sins against you seven times in a day and seven times ask forgiveness, you shall forgive him. I have to be realistic though and realize that some "christians" and enemies of christianity can and do pull from the old and new testament, sayings that suit their taste. I think we are on the same page, but even as a christian it would be extremely impossible to convert a muslim if your main arguments center on what's wrong with them, instead of what Jesus has to offer them.

[tbl]

But there are other sayings as well, that are not parables...


Will you stop cherry picking Scriptures and taking them completely out of context? If you're trying to prove a point, I get it. I already acknowledged that people can take a single Scripture and completely twist it to suit their own needs, but none of the examples you've cited have zilch to do with Christ promoting violence when you look at the obvious context... so why keep doing it?

As far as witnessing to Muslims, that was not my intent. We have zero Muslims on this board so I wasn't trying to convert anybody. Just pointing out the differences since you brought up Christianity as comparable to Islam in regards to violence committed by the respective followers. My whole point is that argument is pointed in the wrong place entirely.

You're giving me a serious case of facepalm...

[adoniijahsooner]

Will you stop cherry picking Scriptures and taking them completely out of context? If you're trying to prove a point, I get it. I already acknowledged that people can take a single Scripture and completely twist it to suit their own needs, but none of the examples you've cited have zilch to do with Christ promoting violence when you look at the obvious context... so why keep doing it?

As far as witnessing to Muslims, that was not my intent. We have zero Muslims on this board so I wasn't trying to convert anybody. Just pointing out the differences since you brought up Christianity as comparable to Islam in regards to violence committed by the respective followers. My whole point is that argument is pointed in the wrong place entirely.

You're giving me a serious case of facepalm...

Alright man I'm done.

[Fraggle145]

How many new species have been introduced into the fossil record since man came on the scene? None.

and so on...

I like everything else you say there... I just take issue with this point. You cant be sure of this. Species in and of themselves are plastic. Species is just an arbitrary category that humans use so that we can try to sort things.

Furthermore, there are plenty of things that have become fossils since the beginning of man. Mammoths, all that stuff. And as perhaps a better example; man himself. Just because we are still living doesnt mean we cant become fossils when we die. If anything the way we inter remains almost guarantees it.

[tbl]

I like everything else you say there... I just take issue with this point. You cant be sure of this. Species in and of themselves are plastic. Species is just an arbitrary category that humans use so that we can try to sort things.

Furthermore, there are plenty of things that have become fossils since the beginning of man. Mammoths, all that stuff. And as perhaps a better example; man himself. Just because we are still living doesnt mean we cant become fossils when we die. If anything the way we inter remains almost guarantees it.

I think we have a misunderstanding. I didn't say no fossils have been introduced since man came on the scene. My point was that no new species have been introduced since man came on the scene (with evidence in the fossil record). I probably should have clarified better.

When I'm referring to new species, I'm referring to a new distinct species being introduced into the animal kingdom. I'm sure micro-evolution has occurred since we were created, but nothing new and distinct as we see throughout the fossil record.

[Frozen Sooner]

Never mind, I'm going to let Fraggle respond to that. Should be interesting. :pop:

[JohnnyMack]

Never mind, I'm going to let Fraggle respond to that. Should be interesting. :pop:

Scoot over. :pop:

[tbl]

:pop: :pop: :pop: :pop:

;)

[Fraggle145]

I think we have a misunderstanding. I didn't say no fossils have been introduced since man came on the scene. My point was that no new species have been introduced since man came on the scene (with evidence in the fossil record). I probably should have clarified better.

When I'm referring to new species, I'm referring to a new distinct species being introduced into the animal kingdom. I'm sure micro-evolution has occurred since we were created, but nothing new and distinct as we see throughout the fossil record.

Ya, I'm gonna have to disagree there ;). New species are introduced all the time. Just because they arent necessarily species that you see very much doesnt mean they arent there (i.e., microbes). But if you want to look at things with backbones then the species flock of cichlids in Africa's Great Lakes pretty much smashes that whole argument. Fish "species" blip in and out of existence there all the time. If you looked at them in the fossil record many of them would be still be distinguishable due to changes in mouth and tooth morphology. However, much of the reason they dont interbreed has nothing to do about whether or not they could produce fertile hybrids (they can and sometimes do). But for the most part they wont screw each other because their reproductive isolation is based on behavior not anatomy.

The term species is very plastic and ambiguous. Most scientists if you twist their arm will tell you species dont really exist. For example if you look at us and chimps we are like 1% different genetically and we are separate "species" however microbes can be lumped in the same species category when they are up to 7% different genetically (depending on who's definition you are using).

Species dont get introduced like on a grand stage where they just appear out of nowhere. They come about most (I emphasize most here) of the time through gradual changes, i.e. selection over time. I mean if you were to take the first Homo sapiens and compare him to us today, we would probably be very different. However there are still cases of rapid evolution and species creation. For example, any time that two species produce a fertile hybrid either on purpose or by accident a new "species" is created. Especially if there are numerous instances of the hybrids being created between the two species, as happens in hybrid zones.

So I am just saying that to state that no new species have arrived on the scene since humans, just simply isnt true. "Species" will continue to form while we are here and they will continue to form long after we are gone.

[tbl]

Sorry for the delay on the response. I think I represented my opinion in a poor way. I agree with your post, and I think we're both getting mixed up (moreso me than you) on "species", which your definition nails down very well (in that there almost isn't a set definition). As I said previously, not only is there ample evidence for microevolution, but speciation as well, which I see as a distinct process. What I am skeptical about are claims regarding the origin of life and macroevolution in the overall Darwinian "origin of life" theory.

My main point is I don't think that microevolutionary mechanisms and mechanisms for speciation can explain large scale biological transformations. Hopefully that clears it up... like mud. ;)

I appreciate the dialogue! :D

Also, to Johnny Mack: I apologize for previously coming across as snippy (whether you took offense or not, I apologize). You know how it is...